One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on March 31, 2008, 11:38:24 PM
-
In the Age tomorrow - Wallace wants 24 player teams
-
Deflection
-
i think there should be 6 on the interchange and keep the 3 emergency's
24 playing and 27 squad
-
what a freakin nutcase he cant even control 22 hows he going to control a extra 24 :rollin
-
Wallace wants 24-player teams
Caroline Wilson | April 1, 2008
RICHMOND coach Terry Wallace has revealed his radical proposal to deal with the rotational revolution, which would allow teams to field up to two emergencies a game, increasing the number of players to 24.
In a paper Wallace plans to present to the AFL this month, the Tigers' coach will argue that the use of interchange players has transformed to the degree that football matches have become contests between two teams of 22 players.
"If you lose two blokes before half-time you just don't win the game," Wallace told The Age last night.
"If you lose one you are far less likely to win the game and what we want to see is an even contest.
"I'm really quite passionate about it because I don't like to see a game impacted because somebody's got hurt," he said.
Wallace was initially unwilling to reveal details of his paper when contacted last night but admitted he had been working on his presentation for some weeks and had planned to go through official AFL channels before making his proposal public.
Under the Wallace plan, teams would name 22 players along with two emergencies who could take the field if one of the original 22 was taken from the ground for the remainder of the match.
His plan received cautious support last night from Brisbane Lions coach Leigh Matthews, who spoke after the Lions' clash with Collingwood about the Magpies' number of interchange rotations. Collingwood used a record 110 interchanges during the game.
"I'm not saying I'm pushing for change but I think the discussion's worth having," said Matthews. "It's 22 players versus 22 and if you lose a player for the match through injury then it becomes 22 versus 21 and you are at a distinct disadvantage," he added.
Wallace has suggested a red-card system whereby a player was permanently removed from the field. Under his proposal the removal would not necessarily have to be through injury because — as Wallace and Matthews agreed — the system could be too easily manipulated.
"It would add another interesting, colourful aspect to the game in my view and would create another talking point," Wallace said.
"The discussion could be over whether you put a key tall in as an emergency or a couple of good runners.
"The way we are moving at the moment we have to look at a solution in one of two ways. Either we restrict the interchange or you don't allow the interchange to completely change the shape of the game and the result.
"Look at round one. Collingwood versus Fremantle and Fremantle lose Heath Black, who is crucial to their midfield, and by losing him they lose 25% of their rotational ability.
"We played Sydney in a practice game in the pre-season and we lost Troy Simmonds and (Jay) Schulz and (Graham) Polak but we had six or seven on the interchange bench and we managed to win. We would have lost that game under the current rules."
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/wallace-wants-24player-teams/2008/03/31/1206850812583.html
-
Wallace wants injury interchange
Greg Denham | April 01, 2008 | The Australian
RICHMOND coach Terry Wallace has thrown his support behind additional interchange players as player rotations have hit an all-time high.
Wallace is keen for the introduction of emergencies who can take to the field to cover injuries should the AFL restrict the use of the interchange bench, which was controversially trialled during this year's NAB Cup.
The Tigers coach wants an additional two players on standby to be able to replace injured players who cannot continue in the game.
Wallace said statistics last season revealed that clubs which lost players through injury, particularly in the first half of games, were severely disadvantaged and lost more times than they won.
He is not in favour of restricting the number of interchange rotations coaches are allowed, which was capped at 16 per quarter, including changes made at the breaks, during the pre-season.
Wallace pointed to an example of two of his players colliding so badly that they could not continue in the match, severely depleting the recovery of others by leaving just two fit players on the bench.
He has received support from four-time premiership coach Leigh Matthews, who last week told The Australian the interchange system could be tinkered with to assist clubs which lost players due to injury.
Matthews admitted to being hamstrung in the opening round against West Coast when an injured Jed Adcock took no part in the second half. Brisbane lost in hot conditions in Perth when it rotated its players just 57 times to the Eagles' 78.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23463093-2722,00.html
-
not a bad idea
-
Sounds a reasonable idea. It won't fly with the AFL though these things never do if they don't think of them themselves, especially if it comes from a coach.
I must admit my first reaction to this was perhaps Terry should spend his time thinking about how to motivate our boys and get the skills right. I appreciate he is thinking about the game but this could be seen as a side issue to his main job with the RFC. Maybe how to beat Collingwood is a better use of his time.
Don't let this distract you Terry. It's us poor supporters on these boards who have to wade through mountains of crap because the teams doing no good. Please don't add fuel to the fire. lol.
-
it wont work for the afl because its not sheedy or collingwood presenting the idea
-
it wont work for the afl because its not sheedy or collingwood presenting the idea
lol. McGuire and his contacts are the only reason Malthouse is taken at all seriously.
-
One thing about Wallet that he is good at, DEFLECTION .
He is very aware that the knifes are being sharpened and the best way he knows is to deflect, please Terry ,24 ::) :o :o :o :o :o
-
I think the idea has merit. I don't think its a deflection strategy as he has reportedly been working on the idea for weeks but who knows?!
I actually like the idea of 4 players on the bench but 2 of them are emergencies rather than 6 and 2 as Terry is suggesting. This would reduce the flood as players would be more tired as the game progresses and prehaps force coaches to place players into more traditional positions during the game rather than having every player in one half of the ground at any one time which ends up looking like a little league game.
I like the idea of emergencies. They add an extra dimension to soccer and would do a similiar thing to our game but as RROFO said - it won't happen because its not a Sheedy or Collywobble idea. :(
Stripes
-
he said during his interview he had been developing the idea over the last few weeks. maybe a bit more effort in coaching the team terry might have improved sunday's result.!!!!!!!!
-
Deflection
I dont think so.
Melbourne are keeping us out of the papers just fine.
If it was deflection he could pick a much better time to come out with it.
i.e. in a couple of weeks when we face the Saints and Cats in consecutive weeks. :help
-
Wallace also said in Tuesdays with Terry that he now delegates the interchange changes to an assistant coach. Plough also said he knows he'll cop criticism for coming out with this as coach of the reigning wooden spooners.
Malthouse liked the idea and said Terry is a man of ideas who thinks about the game's best interests. Malthouse also said he'd go one step further and have 6-8 on the bench like in the NAB Cup.
-
the king of deflection,,,SHEEDY..... was sacked last year
-
Although it'll probably give quick sides a further advantage which suits Wallace, just leave the game alone and let it evolve. More players will just mean more interchanges even if two are subs as a coach can get 1 or 2 players to burn themselves out for a half and then bring on the fresh player after half-time.
-
One thing about Wallet that he is good at, DEFLECTION .
He is very aware that the knifes are being sharpened and the best way he knows is to deflect, please Terry ,24 ::) :o :o :o :o :o
jackstar the knives were never blunt, they have just been sitting idle in the drawer. :shh...but TW knows that, just as the people who are ready to start plunging them in know where to find them.
-
Wallace calls for emergency players
The Age | April 1, 2008 - 8:43PM
Richmond coach Terry Wallace is formulating a plan for the AFL to return to the ancient 19th and 20th men, with a modern twist.
The Richmond coach is preparing a paper for the AFL that addresses the boom trend of interchange rotations, which aim to keep players fresh during a match.
Several coaches were unhappy during the pre-season when the league, worried about the pace of the game, experimented with restricting the number of interchanges per match.
Wallace is worried that even with four men on the bench, there are often so many rotations in a game that a team cannot keep pace with the opposition if it loses a man through injury.
As he puts it, one injury means a team effectively loses 25 per cent of its rotation ability.
It might still have 18 men on the ground, but it is almost playing one short.
Before unrestricted interchange, the AFL only had the 19th and 20th man on the bench and if they were used, the player who came off could not return to the game.
Wallace wants to retain the current system of four men on the bench during a game and also introduce two emergencies - or the 23rd and 24th men.
If they were used, the players whom they replaced would be on the bench for the remainder of the game.
"If you just had two emergency players, it adds another little bit of intrigue to the game, you can use them in any capacity that you want - if you want to use them early, later, it's up to you how you use them," he said.
"It doesn't necessarily need to be from an injury point of view."
Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse, a strong advocate of rotations, praised Wallace for his idea.
"It's got great merit - Terry Wallace is a great thinker in the game, he comes up with some very, very relevant and thoughtful ideas," he said.
"I'd like to think most coaches put the hat on for the competition, as opposed to their own club, and Terry is one of those blokes."
Like Wallace, Malthouse wants the random nature of injuries during a match to have as little impact on the result as possible.
"It would be a shame to see sides trying to struggle through under the present circumstances of interchanges, but lose players and then are totally disadvantaged and they lose the game ... because they just can't go with the opposition," he said.
"I don't know of any team sport - I'm going to be wrong here, for sure - that has a (low) ratio that we've got of players on the bench compared to playing."
Wallace said the game's tactics were in a state of flux, something he is noticing even since this season started.
"It's changed, it's changed very quickly - I've noticed from a coaching point of view, the game has changed in the last fortnight, it's changing that quick," he said.
http://news.theage.com.au/wallace-calls-for-emergency-players/20080401-22yl.html
-
how funny mick pumping up terrys tyres. :lol
-
A bit more from Wallace in the Age
----------------------------
Coaches call for big bench
Michael Gleeson and Carley Jellett | April 2, 2008
Wallace yesterday said his proposal for change was borne of a desire to retain fairness in a match so an early injury to one side did not unfairly affect the result.
The AFL average for interchange use was 58 last year but has risen in the first two rounds of this year to 78.
"It has changed very quickly," Wallace said. "I've noticed from a coaching point of view, the game has changed in the last fortnight. It is changing that quick and certainly our rotation ability, I've given away a lot of what I do (as coach)."
The Tiger coach said he had delegated some rotational changes to his assistant and fitness staff.
"Once upon a time the senior coach controlled every interchange that was going on. As a group now I've handed that across to our strength and conditioning department and (assistant coach) Brian Royal to run that aspect of the game so you solely keep your concentration on what's actually happening on the field."
Wallace said the game as a spectacle was better than ever so he could not understand the motivation for capping the interchange.
"My big theory is once upon a time you used to see all the best marks, all the big clashes in the early part of the game because that's when the dynamics were in the game and as players got tired it got more sloppy," he said. "Now it can be the last five minutes of the match and still see that big mark or the big clash because of the blokes being able to play at high velocity for the whole game. So, to me, that is a better product for people to go and watch."
Wallace said he was more concerned not by how many interchanges there were in a game but ensuring there was parity between sides in the numbers.
Full article at:
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/coaches-call-for-big-bench/2008/04/01/1206850911962.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
-
i think wallace is onto something here
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
It worked for Bruce Monteath lol but you still want the flexibility interchange gives you. Having just subs also means the substitutes miss out on gametime so their fitness level will drop unless subbed early on into a game or dropped to the VFL.
-
leave the bloody game alone.
-
Terry wants to turn the game into basketball, he coaches that way ::)
-
lol
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
It worked for Bruce Monteath lol but you still want the flexibility interchange gives you. Having just subs also means the substitutes miss out on gametime so their fitness level will drop unless subbed early on into a game or dropped to the VFL.
How about 6 subs per quarter with the opportunity to start afresh after each break.
And provision for replacing injuries (off for the rest of the match) as well.
:)
-
A bit more from Wallace in the Age
----------------------------
Coaches call for big bench
Michael Gleeson and Carley Jellett | April 2, 2008
"It has changed very quickly," Wallace said. "I've noticed from a coaching point of view, the game has changed in the last fortnight. It is changing that quick and certainly our rotation ability, I've given away a lot of what I do (as coach)."
I wonder what he means by that- I've given away a lot of what I do
Is he saying that he has already given up on some of the plans that he had for the Tigers in 2008 and maybe even '09, because of this 'interchange revolution'
Er, I hope not Terry. Stick to the plan- that is one of the main aspects of this game. (if that's what you're saying)
I wish I could have heard that because that attitude worries me a bit. Yes, you need to change with the times to some extent. But the Sydney flooding game for example, was a fad, it garnered one flag, maybe two, but lets not try to sail everywhich way the wind is blowing Terry 8)
-
Terry wants to turn the game into basketball, he coaches that way ::)
Sheeds has been asking for 6 or more on the bench since the mid 80s. Didn't he as Victorian coach cost the state a win by fiddling with the bench.
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
It worked for Bruce Monteath lol but you still want the flexibility interchange gives you. Having just subs also means the substitutes miss out on gametime so their fitness level will drop unless subbed early on into a game or dropped to the VFL.
How about 6 subs per quarter with the opportunity to start afresh after each break.
And provision for replacing injuries (off for the rest of the match) as well.
:)
Well it's out there 1965 ;). It sure will make footy different to now forcing 18 players to play even a whole quarter at once.
IMO it wouldn't matter what the AFL decideds to do, coaches will eventually manipulate the bench rules to gain an advantage. I prefer to let the game evolve if there's not a serious problem (rucks doing knees say was a problem needing fixing). At the moment I don't see a problem (apart from us struggling) especially when I see Geelong play. They play awesome footy. Up to the rest of us to catch up.
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
It worked for Bruce Monteath lol but you still want the flexibility interchange gives you. Having just subs also means the substitutes miss out on gametime so their fitness level will drop unless subbed early on into a game or dropped to the VFL.
How about 6 subs per quarter with the opportunity to start afresh after each break.
And provision for replacing injuries (off for the rest of the match) as well.
:)
Well it's out there 1965 ;). It sure will make footy different to now forcing 18 players to play even a whole quarter at once.
IMO it wouldn't matter what the AFL decideds to do, coaches will eventually manipulate the bench rules to gain an advantage. I prefer to let the game evolve if there's not a serious problem (rucks doing knees say was a problem needing fixing). At the moment I don't see a problem (apart from us struggling) especially when I see Geelong play. They play awesome footy. Up to the rest of us to catch up.
There is a problem now (IMHO) when coaches are not actively monitoring the interchanges but leaving the decisions up to the Assistant coaches and fitness staff.
Surely this is a fundamental change to the game that needs to be fixed.
8)
-
How about 6 subs and no interchange?
:)
It worked for Bruce Monteath lol but you still want the flexibility interchange gives you. Having just subs also means the substitutes miss out on gametime so their fitness level will drop unless subbed early on into a game or dropped to the VFL.
How about 6 subs per quarter with the opportunity to start afresh after each break.
And provision for replacing injuries (off for the rest of the match) as well.
:)
Well it's out there 1965 ;). It sure will make footy different to now forcing 18 players to play even a whole quarter at once.
IMO it wouldn't matter what the AFL decideds to do, coaches will eventually manipulate the bench rules to gain an advantage. I prefer to let the game evolve if there's not a serious problem (rucks doing knees say was a problem needing fixing). At the moment I don't see a problem (apart from us struggling) especially when I see Geelong play. They play awesome footy. Up to the rest of us to catch up.
There is a problem now (IMHO) when coaches are not actively monitoring the interchanges but leaving the decisions up to the Assistant coaches and fitness staff.
Surely this is a fundamental change to the game that needs to be fixed.
8)
Agree it is a fundamental change but I don't have a problem with it as the senior coach delegates other responsibilities to assistant coaches already. A senior coach is becoming more and more a manager of the footy dept.
-
I actually like the idea of 4 players on the bench but 2 of them are emergencies rather than 6 and 2 as Terry is suggesting.
Like it.
-
Sheedy supports Wallace's plan
--------------
Sheedy wants a bigger bench
9/04/2008 5:00:35 PM
Ronny Lerner
Sportal
Former Essendon coach Kevin Sheedy supports Richmond coach Terry Wallace's idea to introduce an expanded interchange bench.
http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/sheedy-wants-a-bigger-bench-46343
-
Wallace also said in Tuesdays with Terry that he now delegates the interchange changes to an assistant coach. Plough also said he knows he'll cop criticism for coming out with this as coach of the reigning wooden spooners.
Malthouse liked the idea and said Terry is a man of ideas who thinks about the game's best interests. Malthouse also said he'd go one step further and have 6-8 on the bench like in the NAB Cup.
There lies the problem.
Terry is an ideas man. That's great when you have a list ready to rock.
But right now we need a coach, a plain and simple no stuff about coach.
Terry needs to simplify.